There are several states where, if we as a nation cut them loose, we wouldn't suffer for it. Alabama is one of those states. Take whatever may be of value to the government out, and then burn it to the ground.

Amendment 4 would excise outdated language about poll taxes and separate schools that many consider racist. But the critics say the language being proposed as a substitute undermines funding for public education by reaffirming that there is no right to a public education at taxpayers' expense in Alabama.

Retired University of Alabama law professor Martha Morgan, an expert on Alabama's constitution, says voting "no" on Nov. 6 is likely to give the state another black eye. But she said it's better to get a black eye than "to inflict a mortal wound to public education by taking away the right to public education."

This is why.

"Supporters" are removing the segregation language...but keeping in the language that says there is no right to a public education. They claim it doesn't matter because, according to one supporter, nobody pays any attention to it. Teachers and opponents fear that if the language is reaffirmed--by officially leaving it in the new Amendment--it will provide a means by which the legislature can further cut public education funding.

A similar amendment several years ago would have stricken the public-education language altogether, but was defeated because of fears over increased taxation to support public education.

So this is where we are in America today: We can't remove segregationist language from state constitutions because it leaves in clauses stating there is no right to a public education--and we can't strip out that same language because people are scared we might raise taxes to improve public education. Meanwhile, education in America continues to deteriorate and racial tensions continue to escalate.

Alabama has the most ridiculous, long, and wordy state constitution in the US. They just don't get it. They are the most prone people in the country to get whipped up into a frenzy and codify the derp of the day in their supreme legal document. This is why they can't have nice things.

Coco LaFemme:There are several states where, if we as a nation cut them loose, we wouldn't suffer for it. Alabama is one of those states. Take whatever may be of value to the government out, and then burn it to the ground.

skinink:"The second time won't be any easier than the first because Alabama's two largest black political groups are urging a "no" vote. They say the proposed changes would wipe out some racially charged language, but would retain segregation-era language saying there is no constitutional right to a public education in Alabama. And they've been joined by the state's main teachers' group in refusing to go along."Is there anything a politician cannot properly fark up?

Well...

The Alabama Democratic Conference and the Alabama New South Alliance say the change, backed largely by white Republicans with a pro-business approach, looks like a "feel good" change but is not.

Amendment 4 would excise outdated language about poll taxes and separate schools that many consider racist. But the critics say the language being proposed as a substitute undermines funding for public education by reaffirming that there is no right to a public education at taxpayers' expense in Alabama.

kitsuneymg:Also. If you think Alabama is "dumb", please look up Huntsville and Redstone Arsenal. Basically, it's probably the highest educated city in the US. Silicon Valley might give us a run for the money, but the rest of the US is easily "dumber" than HSV.

I happen to have stunning eyes... it doesn't make the rest of me a supermodel.a grain of sugar doesn't turn a dog turd into chocolate soufflé

There is no right to public education. You cannot have a right to something that must exist through the effort of others. A right, by definition, is something you must be allowed to have. But that's impossible if it requires another person to fulfill it. You have the right to free speech, but not the right to be listened to, because that involves someone else. You have the right to self-defense, but not to be defended by others, because that forces effort on another to serve you. You have the right to practice your religion, but not to make others practice it too, because again, that would involve the necessary actions of someone else to be fulfilled. If your "right" requires action on the part of another person to be fulfilled, it cannot by definition be a right. Public education (like public healthcare) absolutely requires someone else to act in order for it to be fulfilled. There has to be another person actively teaching the public for there to be public education. That's why it can't be a right. What if that teacher doesn't want to teach?

All rights exist naturally within you and are fulfilled by you alone. If they extend past you and require someone else to fulfill them for you, they cannot be a right.

kitsuneymg:GAT_00: doyner: Alabama has the most ridiculous, long, and wordy state constitution in the US.

I think it's actually the longest in the world.

It is.

At 340,136 words, the document is 12 times longer than the average state constitution, 40 times longer than the U.S. Constitution, and is the longest still-operative constitution anywhere in the world. (The English translation of the Constitution of India, the longest national constitution, is about 117,369 words long, a third of the length.)

About 90 percent of the document's length, as of 2012, comes from its 856 amendments. About 70 percent of the amendments cover only a single county or city, and some deal with salaries of specific officials (e.g. Amendment 480 and the Greene County probate judge). This gives Alabama a large number of constitutional officers.

Most of that document could burn and I wouldn't weep. There are all sorts of idiotic bits that need to be undone, but it takes too many votes to get anything to happen. As much derp as there is on the national scene, it's worse locally. I wouldn't trust a single member of our government with a pair of safety scissors.

Also. If you think Alabama is "dumb", please look up Huntsville and Redstone Arsenal. Basically, it's probably the highest educated city in the US. Silicon Valley might give us a run for the money, but the rest of the US is easily "dumber" than HSV.

Ahh, Alabama, where enshrining idiocy in the state Constitution is to be preferred to enshrining it in the state statutes, as every other state does.

WorldCitizen:Rapmaster2000: Thank God, for Alabama. Otherwise, us Georgians would have no one to make fun of. I suppose we could make fun of North Florida, but that's really no different from Macon. It would feel hollow.

Don't worry. Indiana is fighting really hard to be the Alabama of the North. We want to make sure that even the South has someone to point at and make fun of.

I guess i don't understand, given the 14th Amendment, why doing that would even be legal in this country.

NC's Amendment One: "An Act to Amend the Constitution to Provide That Marriage Between One Man and One Woman is the Only Domestic Legal Union That Shall Be Valid or Recognized in This State."

Not only was is solely for the purpose of making gay marriage HARDER, considering it was already illegal here; but the way they worded it: "the Only Domestic Legal Union That Shall Be Valid or Recognized in This State."... it leaves ALL unmarried couples, gay or straight, completely in jeopardy. Victims of DV, Health Insurance, Hospital Visitation rights, Life insurance... the list goes on. Voted by majority. (not by my county, thankfully, but still)

I guess i don't understand, given the 14th Amendment, why doing that would even be legal in this country.

NC's Amendment One: "An Act to Amend the Constitution to Provide That Marriage Between One Man and One Woman is the Only Domestic Legal Union That Shall Be Valid or Recognized in This State."

Not only was is solely for the purpose of making gay marriage HARDER, considering it was already illegal here; but the way they worded it: "the Only Domestic Legal Union That Shall Be Valid or Recognized in This State."... it leaves ALL unmarried couples, gay or straight, completely in jeopardy. Victims of DV, Health Insurance, Hospital Visitation rights, Life insurance... the list goes on. Voted by majority. (not by my county, thankfully, but still)

Rapmaster2000:Thank God, for Alabama. Otherwise, us Georgians would have no one to make fun of. I suppose we could make fun of North Florida, but that's really no different from Macon. It would feel hollow.

Don't worry. Indiana is fighting really hard to be the Alabama of the North. We want to make sure that even the South has someone to point at and make fun of.

Though it ended decades ago, segregation is still mandated by Alabama's constitution. But an effort to remove the outdated language isn't supported by everyone, including some African Americans.

WHAT!??

They say the proposed changes would wipe out some racially charged language, but would retain segregation-era language saying there is no constitutional right to a public education in Alabama.

Oh. Christ, Alabama, WTF

It's not just Alabama; these stupid bait-n-switch amendments and propositions are pretty much standard fair these days. People need to read the entire proposition before voting on it ("Free kittens for everyone...and the addition of a poll tax" Vote YES on Prop 100...for free kittens!)

Point is, the Alabama constitution is a convoluted mess. The ideal thing to do would be throw it out and write a new one, but the fact of the matter is, the new constitution that the lunatics in Montgomery come up with will undoubtedly be 900x worse than whatever is on the books now

ArcadianRefugee:CapeFearCadaver: Why is this being left up to voter majority?

I'd guess because Alabama law says the state's Constitution can only be altered by voter majority.

Fark: Where all of your rhetorical questions will be answered. I understand the technicality, sweetums; though WHY are civil rights issues, in particular, still being left up to a majority vote... anywhere in America? Have we really not moved past this point?

Emposter:FTFA: The U.S. Supreme Court declared anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional in 1967, for instance. But it wasn't until 2000 that Alabama voters removed the state constitution's ban on interracial marriage. Even then, 40 percent voted to keep the ban.

But don't you DARE call us racist. You're the racists, for calling us racist!

I'm sure Mercedes, Honda and Hyundai would be happy to have an uneducated Alabama labor force. "Would you like fries with that" would be music to the ears of all those folks from states that still believe in readin', 'ritin' and 'rithmetic.' Of course those companies may just move after getting tired of being harassed by the local geniuses with badges.

Old prejudicial language is going, old inequities are being kept and expanded.

It doesn't matter what you say you believe--it matters what you do.

I hope somebody is informing the more enlightened voters of Alabama just what their Masters are up to. Because it looks to me that now it is not just slaves who will be denied an education and thus equality and freedom and justice and a decent livelihood, but anybody who can't pay for costly, private-for-profit, superior education.

They're just correcting the mistakes of the past by extended them to the po' whites and new non-white immigrants from the non-white slaves of yesteryear.

I'd be concerned where this would leave us 99%.

Nuke a few of the better neighbourhoods in Alabama on a big bar-b-que weekend when the servants are given the day off to get them from under foot. It'll even things up. That's about the best you can probably hope for. The disease is endemic in Southern Cavalier elites. The things they are cavalier about are other people's well-being and rights, the environment, humanity, truth, fact, and science.

"The second time won't be any easier than the first because Alabama's two largest black political groups are urging a "no" vote. They say the proposed changes would wipe out some racially charged language, but would retain segregation-era language saying there is no constitutional right to a public education in Alabama. And they've been joined by the state's main teachers' group in refusing to go along."